Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,299   Posts: 1,535,783   Online: 739
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    South Pasadena, CA USA
    Posts
    470
    I am just getting to know Michael Smith's Amidol formula. I was reading in one of Steven Anchell's cookbooks about other Amidol formulae, and noticed that the ingredients are the same but the proportions are significantly different.

    What is the effect on the print? For instance, if I use Weston's or Photographer's Formulary's formulae, how will print look different? And assuming that it won't look as...fill in the blank...will it still have deeper blacks and longer range than a more standard developer?

    Yikes, it's late. I hope the question is clear.

    Thanks!

    dgh

    David G Hall

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Nuernberg, Germany
    Posts
    214
    Hi David, there are actually quite a few Amidol formulas out there to play around with. If you check out the unblinking-eye, ed has posted many formulas.

    The differece between the formulas is like trying to describe the difference between various brands of chocolate. Sometimes the difference is as plain as the nose on your face, and other times, there are fine underlying nuances that you might need sometime to discover and come to appreciate. Some of the major differences will be the speed with which the developer works. The Smith formula, with a large amount of amidol, is very powerful and fast working, whereas a formula like that of Peckhams (which has less amidol, but uses catechtol as a second developing agent) is slower working, meanin the development times will be somewhat longer (for my exposure and development technics.).

    The "color" of the final print and the depth of the shadows are two more areas in which difference can be quickly seen. Some of the more subtle things to look for would be the seperation in the mid-tones.

    Selecting an Amidol formula is like selection a paper, a film developer , a film , a lens, etc...
    There is going to be some experimenting involved. And after you get a feel for the individual components of a formula, don't be afraid to "tweak" the basic formula to make it more suitable to your individual needs.
    - William Levitt

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    651
    In this forum or another, Ed Buffaloe (Unblinking Eye) posted a fascinating report that he had tried a number of Amidol formulas, but when he finally tried the one that Paula and I use he got the best results ever. The formula we use came about after I spent years of experimentation. Some people like to experiment. I do not. I prefer to spend my time making photographs. The only reason I experimented before was that I was not getting the results I knew were possible. Since I found what worked, there was no reason to experiment further. In general my advice is to go with whatever works until you are not satisfied with the results. Only then, experiment with other formulas and processes.

    Michael A. Smith

  4. #4
    Aggie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    So. Utah
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,925
    Images
    6
    ..

  5. #5
    Sean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    New Zealand
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,555
    Blog Entries
    7
    Images
    15
    Maybe you can send one of your azo prints in the print exchange aggie? I'd like to see this type of paper.

  6. #6
    Aggie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    So. Utah
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,925
    Images
    6
    ..

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Nuernberg, Germany
    Posts
    214
    Sure you can go with a proven formula, why not, as long as you're satified with the results you're getting. Having someone tell you, "hey, use this formula, it's the best one" is fine, and you're results will more than likely be better than if you had experimented around "looking" for the right combination that suites YOUR tastes and needs.

    But let's not forget the positive aspects of "experimenting", namly learning by trial and error. And through such experimentation, you learn the properties of the individual copmponents found in your formulas. Gee, that doesn't necessarily sound like a bad thing to me.

    "Give a man a fish and feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and feed him for a lifetime..."
    - William Levitt

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    132
    If you are interested in various amidol formulae, check out my page of them at http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Amidol/amidol.html. At the bottom of the page I give my experiences with many of them. For contact printing Azo, Michael Smith's formula is superb. For enlarging, some of the other formulae will find good use.

  9. #9
    Ole
    Ole is offline
    Ole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bergen, Norway
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    9,281
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    31
    I have finally found a European source of Amidol, and ordered a minor quantity to try.

    I have not bought AZO yet (sorry), but got hold of some Bergger Contact G2 from the same source.

    Are there any recommended formulas to try for this paper?
    -- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
    Norway

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    651
    Sorry, Ole, the Bergger "contact printing paper" is not a contact printing paper at all, although they sell it as that. Contact printing papers are silver chloride papers. The Bergger paper is not a silver chloride paper. It has silver iodide in it--the same thing film has. I have seen a fine print on it, once, and it may be a half decent paper. The older contact prints from Weston, Adams, others, were always on silver chloride paper. The only silver chloride paper remaining in production is Azo. I wish it were otherwise, but it is not.

    Michael A. Smith

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin